Re: unfortunately, more
jason varsoke (jjv@caesun.msd.ray.com)
Mon, 16 Aug 1999 17:39:11 -0400 (EDT)
> Recovering that sense of place becomes more and more, therefore, the job of
> the professional scholar and less the job of the casual reader. For me to
> understand the reference to the song Holden heard, I'd have to look it up,
> find a copy, and listen to it. I wouldn't have even known the name of the
> artist, honestly, if you hadn't told me, Scottie :) I'm really more
> acquainted with Beethoven or Mozart than I am with American pop music from 50
> years ago. And there's really no substitute for a song, since music conveys
> a specific feeling in ways we don't understand unless we hear it ourselves.
> I think Camille understands the "feeling," even if she doesn't know the song,
> but I agree that you can't know the feeling the song conveys precisely
> without hearing the song.
Actually, Jim, I don't think you'd have little clue more of what
hearing the song was about by hearing it. (heh, parse that) What's more
important to know is the historical significance of the song. What did
the song mean to the people at that time? More apparent evidence of this
can be found by examining what it means to view a certain work of art at a
certain time. For example that painting of Picasso's the one with the
four naked women (some french title) is very differnent to us in the late
20th century than it was to those seeing it in the early 20th century.
More important than seeing it, is know the historical signficance about
it.
-j